* Christian Hassell never provided NAS the Notebook 3655, which related to Flask 1030 and was the seed stock sent to Dugway to make both Flask 1029 and the 340 ml. Ames then sent to USAMRIID in June 2001

6 Responses to “* Christian Hassell never provided NAS the Notebook 3655, which related to Flask 1030 and was the seed stock sent to Dugway to make both Flask 1029 and the 340 ml. Ames then sent to USAMRIID in June 2001”

DXersaid

DXersaid

Both Flask 1030 and Dugway sample had the Silicon Signature — and Flask 1029 did not. Isn’t it likely that that the Dugway Ames spores shipped on June 2001 (that had used Flask 1030 as the seed stock) also had a silicon signature?

Silicon Signature – what were samples 040030-2 and 040255-1 that showed Silicon Signature? If one was Flask 1030, what was the other? Dugway?

DXersaid

Flask 1030 DID have a silicon signature. Flask 1029 did NOT have a silicon signature. Question: And so which was more likely the seed stock used to make the anthrax mailed in Fall 2001? Answer: Flask 1030.

Science 19 March 2010:
Vol. 327 no. 5972 p. 1435
DOI: 10.1126/science.327.5972.1435
NEWS OF THE WEEK
ANTHRAX INVESTIGATION
Silicon Mystery Endures in Solved Anthrax Case
Yudhijit Bhattacharjee
Scientists inside and outside the government say there is clear evidence that the high levels of silicon found in the anthrax used in the 2001 letter attacks came not from anything added to “weaponize” the anthrax spores—as researchers had suggested early in the probe—but from the culture in which the spores were grown. That evidence may have settled the issue of whether the anthrax was weaponized, at least for scientists familiar with the case. But it raises a different question: Why did the mailed anthrax have such a high proportion of spores with a silicon signature in comparison to most other anthrax samples?

GAO: Why are the so-called “Iraq sample” and Battelle discussed under the heading about IVINS’ knowledge of reported proposals to start conducting animal challenges at USAMRIID with dried Ames anthrax powder? What consulting did the DARPA-funded researchers at GMU’s Center for Biodefense who came to share a suite with Ali Al-Timimi do for Battelle in 1999? What work with virulent Ames did SRI in Frederick, MD do for those researchers?

I have arranged for the uploading of the following dozens of civil depositions relating to Amerithrax. It seems that Dr. Chrisitian Hassell and Dr. Vahid Majidi need to be deposed about the withholding of Notebook 3655 from the NAS and from the public under FOIA.

Dr. Dillon this past week has filed some administrative appeals before the FBI. It seems his FOIA matter is the closest to being ripe for litigation. Or perhaps there will be litigation relating to the truncating of the recent DOD review to not include the pre-911 shipment of the 340 ml from Dugway to USAMRIID for irradiation.

As for my FOIA request, the FBI pretended that it did not receive the referral of my mid-summer request for Notebook 3655, which had been referred from USMRMC. The FBI (via Lauren) then resubmitted it, which the DOJ in defending a suit under FOIA might argue restarted the time running to respond.